@YettyGolf You can still get bad/plugged lies in a perfectly raked bunker but you would eliminate them; placing the ball on a little sand tee is also not part of the game and you'd introduce it.
Also, if you visit so many bunkers that this is an issue, your crappy golf is the real problem.
@Robopz Not sure you're understanding me... the first half of your reply is contesting things which have certainly not been suggested or advocated by me.
For info, as a tournament organiser & rules official, I'm somewhat familiar!
@Robopz The ball could also deflect onto the green/fairway - good/bad bounces happen but good shots don't hit TIOs (except when the TIO is being abused as a favourable free relief opportunity).
I don't want them to be punitive at all, just reasonable. Too often that's not the case.
@Robopz The designation and available relief should depend entirely on the nature of the obstruction. That currently doesn't happen and the result is most often very favourable to the players. The result should be reasonable rather than preferable (or unreasonably penal).
@Robopz Or make them integral objects so free relief is not available.
Also, line of sight relief is too often afforded (to get a better lie and/or preferable line to the green) when the TIO is not actually an obstruction to the shot being played.
@Robopz If designating a tournament construction as a TIO negates what would be a virtually certain lost/unplayable ball or hack out in normal play, relief should be under penalty (PA/OB).
Drop zones for greenside TIOs that can be used as backstops also shouldn't be favourable.
@brayshawgolf@SheringhamGolf Plenty of room for improvement on the first nine holes.
Ultimately, your total score was fairly average (for your handicaps) and you finished 9th out of 19. Seems reasonable.
@twoody12_@JosephLaMagna It is a mistake to think increased distance has only caused problems in the elite game, or that those are the only problems that need solutions.
@golfafter60@Mike_kim714@garrett_TFE Fact.
At least 6 (>20%) of the courses near me have undertaken work to mitigate boundary problems caused by increased distance - tees & greens moved, rerouting/shortening holes, high fences, etc., and even batting-cage style netting around the tee.
@twoody12_@JosephLaMagna It isn't *only* a ball issue. It's also a clubhead and shaft issue, especially (but not exclusively) with the driver.
Which of these items do you suppose costs the least (for everybody) to change?
The position of the tours and the equipment companies has always been that no distance problem exists and nothing should change. They don't want to collaborate with the governing bodies in good faith to formulate a more effective rollback. They want to delay and quibble, quibble and delay until finally the whole thing falls apart.
The proposed golf ball ODS is too tentative and likely wouldn't have the desired effect. That appears true. But if the USGA and R&A continue to give veto power to the game's most regulation-hostile stakeholders, they will never make any significant progress. At some point, they will need to do something Titleist doesn't like, and do it with conviction.
@Mike_kim714@garrett_TFE Problems created by increased distance are more obvious in the elite game but the issues affect everyone.
E.g. relatively low-skilled amateurs are now bombing it onto adjacent highways, schools, and other properties that were previously relatively safe from wayward golf balls.
@USGA@DPWorldTour@PGATOUR@RandA The ball needs limiting far more than the current proposal; and all clubs (but especially the driver) need re-regulating for elite competitions to reduce forgiveness.
@jseubanks Scoring isn't the issue.
Even so, it's very easy to manipulate course setup to restrict scoring, as the PGA did here - see McIlroy's, Scheffler's, Lowry's (and others) comments after the first two rounds.